KARIM NAWAZ ALLADIN,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-14(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2095/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 March 2022AY 2004-054 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that it would be in the interest of justice to restore the matters to the file of the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) was directed to condone the one-day delay and decide the appeals on merits after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with a delay of one day. The CIT(A) dismissed these appeals in-limine without condoning the delay, as the assessee failed to file a formal petition for condonation with supporting evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals in-limine without condoning a one-day delay in filing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas
For Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Hearing: 07/03/2022Pronounced: 08/03/2022

O R D E R PER BENCH: These three appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2007-08 are directed against CIT(A) - 6, Hyderabad’s separate orders, all dated 21/08/2018 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) rws 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short “the Act”.

2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that against the consequential order passed by the AO, dated 29/12/2007

:- 2 -: to 2097/Hyd/2018 Karim Nawaz Alladin, Hyd. for the impugned AYs 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07 the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A) with a delay of 1 day. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals in-limine by holding that the assessee failed to file formal petition for condonation of delay and affidavit along with supporting documentary evidences to demonstrate that there was sufficient cause for the said delay in filing the appeals within the meaning of section 249(3) of the Act.

3.

In the course of hearing, it was pointed out by the learned counsel of the assessee that the learned CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals of the assessee inlimine without condoning the delay of one day in filing the appeals. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to his file for deciding various grounds of appeal on merits. The ld. AR undertook to produce all the relevant documents to substantiate assessee’s case before the CIT(A). The learned DR agreed with the aforesaid statement of the learned AR.

4.

We have considered the facts of the case and the request made by the learned AR. We are of the view that interest of justice will be served if the matters are restored to the file of first appellate authority for deciding various grounds of appeal of the assessee on merits by condoning the 1 day delay in filing the appeals by the assessee. Accordingly, the CIT(A) is directed to afford opportunity of :- 3 -: to 2097/Hyd/2018 Karim Nawaz Alladin, Hyd.

being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the appeals on merits. We direct the assessee to appear before CIT(A) with all the relevant evidences; at its own risk and responsibility to be followed by three effective opportunities of hearing.

5.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Pronounced in the open court on 8th March, 2022.

More judgments on Section 249(3)

All 1,376 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →